Special Edition: Proud Boys Sentencing and Georgia Wrangling
Sep 9, 2023
auto_awesome
Benjamin Wittes, Roger Parloff, and Anna Bower discuss the Proud Boys' sentencing, including comparisons to Oath Keepers. They also delve into the complexities of the ongoing trial in Georgia and analyze the tactics and potential outcomes of Ken Chesbro's trial. The chapter covers topics such as the role of Congress members in the investigation, legal challenges in Colorado, and the implications of alternative electors. The episode concludes with discussions on upcoming court arguments and expressions of gratitude.
The Proud Boys received heavy sentences in federal court, showing their significant role in the January 6th attack.
The trial in Georgia with 19 co-defendants is facing challenges related to severance motions, with some defendants wanting early trials and others preferring a later trial.
The timing of trials depends on various factors for each defendant, including considerations of reputation, support, and legal strategies.
Deep dives
Proud Boys Sentences
The recent Proud Boys sentencing in federal district court in Washington resulted in heavy sentences for several members. Enrique Tarrio, the top leader, received a 22-year sentence, which is two years above the maximum for seditious conspiracy. Ethan Nordeen received 18 years, Joe Biggs received 17 years, Zach Reel received 15 years, and Dominic Pizzola, who broke the glass at the Capitol, received 10 years. These sentences are heavier than those given to Oath Keepers, showing the significant role the Proud Boys played in the January 6th attack. While the government may appeal the sentences, they are already substantial.
Georgia Trial Severance
The ongoing trial in Georgia involving 19 co-defendants is facing challenges related to severance motions. Two defendants want early trials, but separate from each other. The others want to be separated from the two but don't mind being tried together. However, they prefer to delay the trial as much as possible. The government, on the other hand, wants to try all 19 defendants together in October. The judge ruled that the speedy trial defendants, Chaz Brough and Powell, will be tried together, but deferred a decision on the other 17 defendants. It seems likely that the October trial will proceed for Chaz Brough and Powell, while a later trial will be scheduled for the remaining defendants.
Considerations for Going to Trial
The decision on whether to go to trial quickly or delay proceedings depends on various factors for each defendant. If defendants are not incarcerated, delaying the trial can work in their favor as memories fade and witnesses become less reliable. Some defendants may prefer to delay their trials to explore potential plea bargains or wait for favorable circumstances. However, for defendants facing high-profile charges or relying on the support of others, going to trial quickly may be preferred to avoid tarnishing their reputation or jeopardizing support. Each defendant's specific circumstances and legal strategies are likely to influence their approach to the timing of their trial.
The Difficulty of the Second Trial Without Stuart Rhodes
The second trial of four defendants in the January 6th attack on the Capitol did not include Stuart Rhodes, a key figure in the case. Some theorize that the absence of a clear contrast between the defendants and a notorious figure like Rhodes may have affected the outcome. The prosecution's ability to distinguish this case from previous incidents, such as the contingent elector forms in Hawaii in 1960, remains a crucial factor that could impact the trial.
The Removal Conversation and Trump's Strategy
There are ongoing discussions regarding the potential removal of several defendants' cases from state court to federal court. Mark Meadows, in particular, presents a stronger case for removal due to his argument that his actions as chief of staff were within the scope of his duties. Donald Trump has not yet filed for removal, and his decision may depend on the outcome of Meadows' situation. The validity of removal motions and the potential implications for other cases are still being debated.
It's another episode of our weekly live stream series, “Trump's Trials and Tribulations,” which takes place on YouTube each week on Thursday afternoons at 4 p.m. ET.
This week, Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Roger Parloff and Lawfare Legal Fellow Anna Bower, to talk about the latest events in Proud Boys sentencing and in Georgia. They talked about the hefty sentences that Enrique Tarrio and other Proud Boys received this week in federal district court in Washington, about how these sentences compare to those received by Oath Keepers and other Jan. 6 perpetrators, and about the machinations in Georgia—removal, immunity, severance, and all the other stuff that is going on with poor Judge McAfee trying to deal with a 19-defendant trial.
